* Tom Lane ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Do you agree with the other changes (ColId -> SchemaName, ColId ->=20 > > SavePointId) ? > > I don't really see the value of them. They add some marginal > documentation I suppose, but they also make the grammar bigger and > slower. A more substantial objection to the practice is that it can > introduce needless shift/reduce conflicts, by forcing the parser into > making unnecessary decisions before it has enough context to > determine what kind of name a particular token really is.
Perhaps the name of 'ColId' should be changed then. At least to me that comes across as 'Column Identifier', and apparently some others thought it wasn't appropriate for user names (UserId existed and was mapped to ColId prior to my patch). Personally, I'd just like it to be consistent, when I was looking at how to add the grammar for group ownership group names were identified in one place as 'ColId' and another as 'UserId', iirc. Stephen
Description: Digital signature